SF/F Books: Chapter Two - What Are You Reading?
- Thread starter Neroon
- Start date
Okay, I finished Rendezvous With Rama. I really, really hate to say it, but...I was disappointed. And for that I blame myself entirely, not Arthur C. Clarke. I had built up my expectations for something along the lines of 2001 and 2010, with the same sense of cosmic awe and wonder, maybe even with something quite spectacular happening at the end; instead, it turned out to be more about the technical miracles of Rama (which I couldn't find myself caring about outside of the mystery of what certain things were and did) than about how it impacts humanity. Of course, all of this is standard for hard science fiction, and the more I read of the genre the more I'm convinced it isn't really for me. I found myself at several points wondering why Clarke hadn't just written a theoretical paper on what a habitat cylinder would be like instead of a novel; without any strong characters the whole story just sort of fell flat for me, and then the ending, more than anything else, really left me scratching my head and asking, "So what was the point?"
Oh well. Sorry, those of you who were recommending it, but it just didn't grab me the way I wanted it to; no one feels worse about that than me.
A bunch of mysteries set up with no resolution whatsoever? Rama just comes and goes with no regard for anything in the Solar System let alone humanity. The crew of the Endeavour weren't the only ones feeling short-changed when I read it...
Oh well. Sorry, those of you who were recommending it, but it just didn't grab me the way I wanted it to; no one feels worse about that than me.
Sorry Rama didn't do it for you. Clarke has never been big on characterization. You want hard SF with good characters, try Orbital Decay by Allen Steele. I find the older authors in the hard SF area lacked character depth but someone like Steele, who grew up reading the "New Wave" by Ellison, Malzeburg, and Silverberg understands the importance of creating good protagonists.
Rama didn't do it for me either. I'm more into Clarke's short stories.
Just finished Rise of Endymion, about to start I am Legend.
Spoilers below here for Rise of Endymion/Hyperion saga:
I'm of two minds about Rise of Endymion -- Simmons did a very good job of wrapping up all of the plot threads from the first 3 novels, and revealed a sufficient chunk of the way his universe worked for me to be happy. I totally bought the love between Aenea and Raul, and was totally, utterly floored when she admitted to having been married and having a kid during their 2 years apart (though I managed to figure out the twist regarding that way before Raul did).
But I was disappointed in the growth of the titular Endymion character -- he seemed to grasp things way too slowly, did not ask nearly enough questions (or demand satisfactory answers to the ones he did ask) about his crazy journey, and seemed to gain "powers" at the end that were out of step with his growth within "the void which binds." Throughout the novel it seemed like EVERYONE around him knew more about what was going on, even though he was theoretically Aenea's second in command/beloved/focus of her life. It also seemed like a few of the characters from the original Hyperion were thrown into the story for no good reason.
I do not like stories that utilize an "unreliable narrator" -- it seems like a cheat for the author to be able to go back and retconn things at will. I did not like how Uncle Martin's Cantos and the Technocore's explanation of things ended up as either "lies" or "partially correct" in this novel. I think a case could be made that Simmons planned this from the start, as there were clearly some foreshadowing that the technocore wasn't all it was cracked up to be and that other things existed within "the void which binds". But the ending of Hyperion/Fall of Hyperion and its focus on the Ultimate Intelligence issue seemed to be made moot and pointless with this novel, which barely touched on the UI issue at all (especially the "fleeing empathy component" -- what was up with that?)
Overall, I'd give it a B+ compared to Hyperion/Fall of Hyperion's A+. I just didn't like the changes to the story and some of the obvious deus ex machinas, though I found myself caring for the characters and rooting them on.
Spoilers below here for Rise of Endymion/Hyperion saga:
I'm of two minds about Rise of Endymion -- Simmons did a very good job of wrapping up all of the plot threads from the first 3 novels, and revealed a sufficient chunk of the way his universe worked for me to be happy. I totally bought the love between Aenea and Raul, and was totally, utterly floored when she admitted to having been married and having a kid during their 2 years apart (though I managed to figure out the twist regarding that way before Raul did).
But I was disappointed in the growth of the titular Endymion character -- he seemed to grasp things way too slowly, did not ask nearly enough questions (or demand satisfactory answers to the ones he did ask) about his crazy journey, and seemed to gain "powers" at the end that were out of step with his growth within "the void which binds." Throughout the novel it seemed like EVERYONE around him knew more about what was going on, even though he was theoretically Aenea's second in command/beloved/focus of her life. It also seemed like a few of the characters from the original Hyperion were thrown into the story for no good reason.
I do not like stories that utilize an "unreliable narrator" -- it seems like a cheat for the author to be able to go back and retconn things at will. I did not like how Uncle Martin's Cantos and the Technocore's explanation of things ended up as either "lies" or "partially correct" in this novel. I think a case could be made that Simmons planned this from the start, as there were clearly some foreshadowing that the technocore wasn't all it was cracked up to be and that other things existed within "the void which binds". But the ending of Hyperion/Fall of Hyperion and its focus on the Ultimate Intelligence issue seemed to be made moot and pointless with this novel, which barely touched on the UI issue at all (especially the "fleeing empathy component" -- what was up with that?)
Overall, I'd give it a B+ compared to Hyperion/Fall of Hyperion's A+. I just didn't like the changes to the story and some of the obvious deus ex machinas, though I found myself caring for the characters and rooting them on.
I'm a Dune fan too. Currently reading Chapterhouse: Dune after recently completing Heretics of Dune. The series is amazing.
I like Dog Star. It's an unconventional choice.
David Brin: "Earth"
Possibly his worst novel-don't be afraid to try his other stuff if you aren't impressed with this.
Actually, I already read Brin's "Startide Rising", "The Uplift War", "The Postman", and "Foundation's Triumph".
As a matter of fact, I was a bit underwhelmed by "The Uplift War" despite having read good things about it before. Maybe I'll have to try it again one day.
As for "Earth"... I have not much to complain so far. Why is it supposed to be bad? Is it the ending, since I'm only half-way through so far?
Hmm, maybe you should form your own opinion. Check back when you are done.
Uplift was lopsided. The majority of it was a close up tale of 2 characters but the giant story happening around them overwhelmed the book by the end. Startide was great, Postman was fun and I won't touch Foundation's-hate it when authors pull a Kevin J Anderson and glom onto other author's work. (exception being the 1632 books-love those).
Uplift was lopsided. The majority of it was a close up tale of 2 characters but the giant story happening around them overwhelmed the book by the end. Startide was great, Postman was fun and I won't touch Foundation's-hate it when authors pull a Kevin J Anderson and glom onto other author's work. (exception being the 1632 books-love those).
Well, it's been a while since I read the "Second Foundation trilogy" but I think I found Benford's entry pretty weak, while I enjoyed Bear's and Brin's novels. And Bear and Brin are definitely better authors than Kevin J. Anderson.
Last edited:
Currently reading "WWW: Wake" by Robert J. Sawyer.
Well, it's been a while since I read the "Second Foundation trilogy" but I think I found Benford's entry pretty weak, while I enjoyed Bear's and Brin's novels. And Bear and Brin are definitely better authors than Kevin J. Anderson.
Kevin J Anderson= hack in my book. I've said it b4 in other threads. I object to taking the other man's work and making it your own-KJA just steals with the most obvious $ in mind. Brin better get his butt back into the originality area and Benford is getting old. IMO
If you want to see a "shared universe" go check out 1632 series. ericflint.com usually works-or Baen's books.
And I'm part of the faction that says the only book is Dune, and don't bother with the rest of the series. God bless those of you who like 'em, though.
As for me, I'm currently 100 pages into King's The Stand. At this rate, I'm going to piss away my entire summer on this book, and we'll see you in October.
I'm a big Brin fan, and I think the Foundation book was his only foray into "un-originality"...
Thank god, too.
Similar threads
